Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Oh so your just on this thread to troll and mess with people. I see. I just quoted you 4 posts ago.

Anyway since your just trying to troll and mess with people ignoring your posts on the matter.

Wow, this goon tag is just OP.

My point is this stealth change is not just about ISBoxer. It's about imbalance. Ball of stealth ships = imbalance. Whether it's one player controlling 50 stealth ships, or 50 players with 1 stealth ship each, it's the same scenario: Numbers were used to overcome an attempted balance to cloaks.

There is a group of people who blame ISBoxer for this change, my statement was regarding those people. (review: ball of stealth ships = imbalance, ISBoxer or not ISBoxer)

also, I know a bit about what goes on in wormholes.

seems grrgoons is keeping you from thinking straight right now Xyon.

Sup Rek

Do I sense a death 2 afk cloaky post in there somewhere

Oh, just checking. Hey, I wanna become an wormhole too

Lets compare bombers to destroyers:
Similar HP? Yes.
Similar sig radius? Yes.
Similar powergrid? Yes.
Similar velocity? Yes.
Similar align time? Yes.
Similar mass? Yes.
Similar damage output? Yes.
Similar warp speed? Finally yes.

Conclusion: Stealth Bombers are destroyers, not frigates.

It was never considered bug. CCP tried taking it out because large stealth fleets were struggling with it, and bombers primarily work in large groups.

I think they should add a module that covert ops ships can equip into a high slot which would allow them to see cloaked fleet members while they are cloaked. Bombers could elect to equip this module at the cost of one torpedo launcher. If they are dedicated to doing bombing runs, they probably don't want the torpedoes so badly.

Any update from CSM/CCP on the cloak change?

Yes, it would be nice to have a response from CCP after so much negative feedback regarding such senseless change.

Also, the loss in agility of the bomber will nerf it on a niche usage that is hunting covert ops in exploration sites. The ship is already quite a slug compared to a cov ops and this increase in mass might push it out of this niche usage for a solo bomber.

I kind of like the concept of damage intensity based on position from the blast point. Aiming your bomb at the correct range requires extra skill and risk to pull off. By risk I'm talking about unplanned bomb runs where you get a warp in but don't necessarily have an ideal warp out point. This mechanic would strike a balance of aiming for optimal damage vs. optimal survival.

It would buff faster fleets too. Frigate and Cruiser fleets can zip around relatively quick making it much harder to pinpoint where they will be when bombs detonate. A skilled fleet could change their trajectory to mitigate a lot of damage that way. Battleships fleets, especially shield ships, are out of luck but that's the cost of having more tank and less maneuverability. If nothing else they can still microjump out of the blast. UNLESS they get void bombed first =)

AoE damage could also use explosive velocity to calculate damage instead of signature since this hurts shield ships so much more than armor. The faster you are the less likely you take damage. Current mechanics essentially say microwarp drive + bomb = death with a lot fewer bombs required to kill the target.

At any rate AoE damage scaling could be all that's needed to put the skill back into bombing without nerfing all cov ops doctrines into oblivion. I really hope the cloak change doesn't happen cause we might as well take the Stealth out of Stealth Bombers.

So all this means smaller ships survive longer and can be used again. Massed blobs of hard hitting battleships can still be countered by bombers. The smaller ships being able to survive bombs easier with those mechanics will EAT BOMBERS ALIVE with current stats on bombers. Smaller ships not dying so easily = bombers getting locked up and killed = bombs not detonating.

Think about it. Varied fleet comps become a thing again and all those fleet types have viable counters.

Whatever they do, I doubt CCP intends to make any significant changes to bomb damage code that could result in it being more complex than it already is. Those hamsters have a tough enough time as it is per tick, determining all the cause and effect of each AOE.